The Benefits of Dynamic Pricing of Default Electricity Service Bernie Neenan UtiliPoint International Prepared for Assessing the Potential for Demand Response.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
SmartPOWER Critical Peak Pricing (CPP) June 3, 2008.
Advertisements

Achieving Price-Responsive Demand in New England Henry Yoshimura Director, Demand Resource Strategy ISO New England National Town Meeting on Demand Response.
The Role of Dynamic Pricing in Fostering the Efficient Use of Electric Sector Resources Presented to Kansas Corporate Commission Workshop on Energy Efficiency.
Dynamic Pricing - Potential and Issues Joe Wharton and Ahmad Faruqui Kansas Corporation Commission Workshop on Energy Efficiency March 25, 2008.
Demand Response: The Challenges of Integration in a Total Resource Plan Demand Response: The Challenges of Integration in a Total Resource Plan Howard.
Will CO2 Change What We Do?
Avoided Cost and E3 Calculator Update Workshop March 14-15, 2006.
Time-of-Use and Critical Peak Pricing
1 The Potential For Implementing Demand Response Programs In Illinois Rick Voytas Manager, Corporate Analysis Ameren Services May 12, 2006.
Document number Finding Financial Solutions & Models for Microgrids Maryland Clean Energy Summit Panel Wednesday, October 16, 2013.
1 July 15, 2007Alcoa Energy Regulatory Affairs NARUC / FERC Demand Response Collaborative Perspectives of a Large End Use Participant of NYISO Programs.
1 Wal-Mart’s View on Demand Response Program Design Anoush Farhangi Angela Beehler.
Demand Response in New York State Northwest Power and Conservation Council DR workshop February 24, 2006.
Resource Adequacy in PJM
Energy and Environmental Economics 1 Avoided Cost and E3 Calculator Workshops Energy and Environmental Economics, Inc. October 3, 2005.
Smart Meters, Demand Response and Energy Efficiency GRIDSCHOOL 2010 MARCH 8-12, 2010  RICHMOND, VIRGINIA INSTITUTE OF PUBLIC UTILITIES ARGONNE NATIONAL.
Susan Covino Senior Consultant, Emerging Markets March 31, 2015
November 2001 CHRISTENSENASSOCIATES RTP as a Demand Response Program – How Much Load Response Can You Expect? Peak Load Management Alliance Fall Conference.
Solutions to California’s Energy Crisis: Real-Time Pricing by Frank Wolak Chairman, Market Surveillance Committee March 17, 2001.
Developing Critical-Peak Pricing Tariffs with the PRISM Software Ahmad Faruqui May 30, 2007.
Real-time Pricing for Illinois Consumers Anthony Star Community Energy Cooperative Demand Response Coordinating Committee Webinar December 15, 2006.
TIME OF USE RATES AT THE UNITED ILLUMINATING COMPANY Presented at: Connecticut’s Energy Future December 2, 2004 James D. Lundrigan Pricing Manager The.
Time-Varying Retail Electricity Prices: Theory and Practice by Severin Borenstein.
ANALYZING YOUR ELECTRIC BILL Bob Walker Met-Ed November 7, 2007.
North American Electricity Markets APEX Paris, France October 15-16, 2007 Kenneth Laughlin, PJM.
Demand Response in MISO Markets NASUCA Panel on DR November 12, 2012.
1 Demand Response Update April, Strategic Perspective Demand Response  Aligns with PGE’s Strategic Direction; helping to provide exceptional.
California Statewide Pricing Pilot Lessons Learned Roger Levy Demand Response Research Center NARUC Joint Meeting Committee on Energy.
Convergence Bidding Issues Eric Hildebrandt, Ph.D. CAISO Department of Market Monitoring CPUC Convergence Bidding Workshop July 26, 2010.
Pricing Enabled by AMI What Types? What are the Benefits? Dr. Steven D. Braithwait Christensen Associates Energy Consulting EUCI Webinar September 12,
Measurement, Verification, and Forecasting Protocols for Demand Response Resources: Chuck Goldman Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory.
Demand Response Research and Capabilities at LBNL Chuck Goldman Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory Midwest Demand Response Initiative.
Demand Response in Midwest ISO Markets February 17, 2008.
Overview of the North American and Canadian Markets 2008 APEX Conference in Sydney, Australia October 13, 2008 Hung-po Chao Director, Market Strategy and.
Retail Competition: Managing a Difficult Transition David L. O’Connor Commissioner Massachusetts Division of Energy Resources (DOER) Presentation to National.
APPENDIX Price Suppression In Economic Theory Supply vs. Efficiency Resource Allocation – Vertical Integration (Slides 2 through 7) – Wholesale Competition.
U.C. Energy Institute1 Efficiency, Wealth Transfers and Risk Management Under Real-time Electricity Pricing Severin Borenstein Haas School of Business,
1 New England Demand Response Resources: Present Observations and Future Challenges Henry Yoshimura Demand Resources Department ISO New England, Inc. Holyoke,
Demand Response: Keeping the Power Flowing in Southwest Connecticut Presented by: Henry Yoshimura Manager, Demand Response ISO New England September 30,
HOW WILL AMI & DYNAMIC PRICING AFFECT LOW INCOME USERS? Ahmad Faruqui, Ph. D. Principal National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners New York,
Options to Manage Electricity Demand and Increase Capacity in Santa Delano County Jon Cook Jeff Kessler Gabriel Lade Geoff Morrison Lin’s Lackeys.
“Demand Response: Completing the Link Between Wholesale and Retail Pricing” Paul Crumrine Director, Regulatory Strategies & Services Institute for Regulatory.
Rate Design Indiana Industrial Energy Consumers, Inc. (INDIEC) Indiana Industrial Energy Consumers, Inc. (INDIEC) presented by Nick Phillips Brubaker &
Linking the Wholesale and Retail Markets through Dynamic Retail Pricing Presented by: Henry Yoshimura Manager, Demand Response ISO New England September.
PJM©2013www.pjm.com Economic DR participation in energy market ERCOT April 14, 2014 Pete Langbein.
DR Valuation RON-01 Phase 2 Proposal January 31, 2006.
Demand Response: What It Is and Why It’s Important 2007 APPA National Conference San Antonio, Texas June 26, :00 a.m. to Noon Glenn M. Wilson Director.
Idaho Power Company Demand Response & Dynamic Pricing Programs PNDRP December 5, 2008 Darlene Nemnich Pete Pengilly.
Electric Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT) A Success Story… In Progress Ingmar Sterzing United States Association of Energy Economics (USAEE) Pittsburgh.
Emergency Demand Response Concept Overview and Examples Presented to: ERCOT December 3, 2004 Presented by: Neenan Associates.
Illinois Wholesale Market Update December 10, 2003.
Ice Storage for Peak Load Reduction Chris Smith NYSERDA NARUC 2007 Summer Meeting.
An Overview of Demand Response in California July 2011.
Government’s Evolving Role in Resource Planning and Environmental Protection Arthur H. Rosenfeld, Commissioner California Energy Commission April 19, 2002.
G 200 L 200 ISO NEW ENGLAND T H E P E O P L E B E H I N D N E W E N G L A N D ’ S P O W E R. Southwest Connecticut RFP Markets Committee November 14, 2003.
Incentives and Rate Designs for Efficiency and Demand Response Drs. Steven D. Braithwait & Laurence D. Kirsch CA Energy Consulting DRRC/CEC Workshop January.
2015 California Statewide Critical Peak Pricing Evaluation DRMEC Spring 2016 Load Impact Evaluation Workshop San Francisco, California May, 2016 Prepared.
Multi-Use Application Use Case #3: Optimized Pricing and Resource Allocation (OPRA) Project. May 3, 2016.
Communicating Thermostats for Residential Time-of-Use Rates: They Do Make a Difference Presented at ACEEE Summer Study 2008.
California Independent System Operator 1 Department of Market Analysis California Independent System Operator California ISO Creation Time: July,
Advanced Meter School August 18-20,2015 Time of Use and Load Profile Jeremiah Swann.
Introducing Smart Energy Pricing Cheryl Hindes
Time of Use Rates: A Practical Option – If Done Well
Integrating Distributed Energy Resource into Grid Operations
Demand Response in the 7th Power Plan
penetration of wind power
It’s a Matter of Time: Analyzing the Effects of Dynamic Rate Designs on Low-Income and Senior Electricity Consumers.
New England Electricity Restructuring Roundtable
2500 R Midtown Sacramento Municipal Utility District
Avoided Cost and E3 Calculator Update Workshop
Presentation transcript:

The Benefits of Dynamic Pricing of Default Electricity Service Bernie Neenan UtiliPoint International Prepared for Assessing the Potential for Demand Response Programs Institute for Regulatory Policy Studies May 12, 2006

2 Source: The Benefits of Demand Response in Electricity Markets and Recommendations for Achieving Them. Feb. 2006,. USDOE < 15 min Energy efficiency Price-Based Demand Response DA-RTPRTP TOU Years System planning Months Operational planning Day-ahead Scheduling In-day Dispatch < 15 min System management action Time scale RT balanced and regulated system Induced Demand Response ICAP KWH Bidding Emer DR DLC I/C Load Integrating DR into Electricity Markets

3 Dynamic Pricing – It’s About Time 6:00 am 1:00 am 10:00 pm 12:00 pm 8:00 am 12:00 6:00 pm 2:00 pm x.x Indicates the relative price/kWh Higher price ratio 1.2 TOU 3 (6 hr) 1.75 Cover swing hours } } TOU 2S (6 hr) 2.0+ Maximize price ratio } TOU 2 (16 hr) } }

4 Dynamic Pricing – It’s About Time (2) TOU 2S (6) 2.0+ VPP (6) 1.1 to 10 Tie daily peak prices to market prices 1.0 RTP Tie all hourly prices to market prices CPP (6) 1.50 or 5.0 One peak price for normal days, and another for extreme days

5 Benefits of Dynamic Pricing Participant Savings  Savings to customers that take default service consist of two components: Avoid paying the hedged service risk premium Savings from demand response behaviors Savings from shifting away from high prices Consumer surplus from expanded load at low prices Benefits to all Electricity Consumers  L ower LMPS reduce bilateral market prices: Lower competitive prices Lower default service prices

6 Benefits of Dynamic Pricing (2) Peak Load Reduction – Two Measures  Maximum single hour of demand response (MW) on annual basis  Average level of demand response (MW) coincident with June, July, August and September monthly zonal maximum demands Market Performance benefits  Resource Savings - Improvement in the efficient allocation of societal resources

7 Benefits of Dynamic Pricing (3) Other Benefits  Improved reliability  Market power mitigation  Reduced emissions  More choices  Portfolio risk reduction  Vertical market development (enabling technologies) These are hard to quantify, redundant or both

8 Benefits of Dynamic Pricing of Default Service in New England Service Benefits of alternative default service pricing Targeted to New England customers over 500 kW Customers distinguished by:  Business activity  Load size and profile  Price response (from NGrid Study) Scenarios characterize market supply as:  Status Quo (2004-5)  High (more high prices more often)  Extreme (even more higher prices more frequent)

9 Alternative Designs Evaluated VPP (6) 1.1 to RTP CPP (6) 1.50 or 5.0 TOU 2 (16 hr) TOU 3 (6 hr) 1.75 Current Default Block & Swing Dynamic Default Service Alternatives

10 Block and Swing Block and Swing Design Nominate kW (peak and off- peak) to fixed price block (TOP) Variance settled at the corresponding RTP swing price 1.0 RTP 1.2 TOU Block Load Pricing + Swing Load Pricing

11 PRICE FX SS and DD Simulations PRICE FX SS and DD Simulations LMPs (DA & RT) by Day Type, Price Scenario Price Elasticities by Business Class Customer Profiles and SICs LSE Energy Market Savings LSE Energy Market Savings LSE Hedge Savings LSE Hedge Savings Net Social Welfare Improvement Net Social Welfare Improvement Participant Bill Savings Participant Bill Savings Status Quo Yr Extreme Yr High Yr 5 -Yr. Benefit Outlook Market Outlook Price FX Model Rates

12 Maximum Non-Coincident Peak Load Reduction – New England ~ 600 MW

13 Average Coincident Monthly Peak Load Reduction – New England ~ 200 MW Coincidence of High Prices and High Load

14 Benefits – Five Year Outlook – New England (33% of customers over 500 kW price responsive)

15 Some Observations Autonomous price response is the desired end result  Don’t expect bloom naturally  Flat default service engenders price inelasticity  Dynamic default service fosters the development of price response Load bidding as a resource is poor second best solution Because reliability is a social good, ISO ICAP, emergency and ancillary service programs

16 Summary I welcome your comments and criticisms: